Skip to content


Mewa Ram Vs. NaraIn Das and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in46Ind.Cas.158
AppellantMewa Ram
RespondentNaraIn Das and ors.
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 526(e) - transfer of case--accused known to magistrate whether ground for transfer--transfer to magistrate unacquainted with parties. - - the learned counsel who appears in support of the application explains that it would be better for both parties that the case should be heard by some one who knows nothing about them and that it is more likely that justice will be obtained from such an officer......date or was in court on every date when the case came up for trial. the deponent says that lala ram nath, one of the bench magistrates is a personal friend of the accused narain das and his two sons. he also says that the accused are in debt to lala ram nath, the said bench magistrate. he gives no foundation for the first of the two allegations. the second is said to rest upon a copy of a mortgage-deed twelve years old obtained from the registration office a few days ago. such an affidavit is not worth the paper on which it is written. i am told that the application is made under section 526(e), criminal procedure code, and that the transfer sought, is expedient far the ends of justice. the learned counsel who appears in support of the application explains that it would be better.....
Judgment:

1. This is an Application for the transfer of a case of which the number is given and is said to be between Mewa Ram and Narain Das and others, residents of Etawah. The case is said to be pending in the Court of Bench Magistrates, Etawah. The application is that it be transferred from that Court to some other Magistrate of Etawah competent to try the case. It is supported by an affidavit of the vaguest description. No date whatever is given in the affidavit from beginning to end. There is nothing to show that the person who swore to the affidavit, was in Court on any particular date or was in Court on every date when the case came up for trial. The deponent says that Lala Ram Nath, one of the Bench Magistrates is a personal friend of the accused Narain Das and his two sons. He also says that the accused are in debt to Lala Ram Nath, the said Bench Magistrate. He gives no foundation for the first of the two allegations. The second is said to rest upon a copy of a mortgage-deed twelve years old obtained from the registration office a few days ago. Such an affidavit is not worth the paper on which it is written. I am told that the application is made under Section 526(e), Criminal Procedure Code, and that the transfer sought, is expedient far the ends of justice. The learned Counsel who appears in support of the application explains that it would be better for both parties that the case should be heard by some one who knows nothing about them and that it is more likely that justice will be obtained from such an officer. This ground is not set out in Section 526, Criminal Procedure Code, and I have not been referred to any precedent showing that this is the interpretation to be placed upon Section 526(e), Criminal Procedure Code. I shall not venture even to suppose that the learned gentlemen who sit on the Bench with Lala Ram Nath are so indifferent to their reputation and so subservient as to allow Lala Ram Nath to lead them to pass an order contrary to what seems to them to be just. I see absolutely no ground for interfering and direct that the case proceed to trial with all speed, the stay order is discharged.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //